Don’t Scold A Blind Man For Not Seeing.

317049_337544456361153_387417502_n

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You may not scold a blind man for not seeing but you can at least grab a hold of him if you see he’s about to walk over a cliff. Anything other than that would be uncaring and evil. I have to acknowledge though that there is a cunning adversary, whose been at this longer than I, who has many unwitting allies. Why else other than turning a blind eye, could people reject such glaring evidence?

What some evolutionists and scientists will bend over backwards to prove is that all life, yes everything you see, somehow started by accident; order came from disorder, something came from nothing. Have you ever taken nothing and tried to make something – try it some day? I have a problem looking at a building and trying to imagine there’s no designer. Surely when you see a creation; order, information, immaterial, universal and consistence laws of science, maths, logic, morality, it is blatantly obvious that there is a creator – “What ships, I see no ships”.

Firstly, if everything is just a glorious accident, then it has no meaning and no purpose. If life is just an accident, then everything and everyone is just here today and gone tomorrow; in other words, we are coming from nowhere and going nowhere.

Secondly, without God and His laws, ways, precepts and teachings, we would be lost. If there’s no God, then there’s no devil; if there’s no good then there’s no evil, and then everything becomes relative and there are no absolutes anymore. Heaven doesn’t exist, hell doesn’t exist and whatever we do, whether good or bad, is neither here nor there.

What’s good for one person might be bad for another, and who is to say what’s good and evil anyway?

Thirdly, if we all evolved from the same early life form, why do we all look so astonishingly and radically different, and why are some life forms extremely advanced like humans while others are much more basic, like earthworms and slugs?

Fourthly, if evolution is a provable reality, where are all the subspecies, all the creatures that are halfway between one species and another? Where are all the half-men/half-apes?

Fifthly, the way things are set out in the world, our distance from the sun, the way fruit and vegetables grow, the perfect balance of gases to give life to your lungs (which did evolve the plants or the insects to pollinate the plants?) the way rain gives life and all the things on earth are too perfect to be an accident…: Set off a car bomb in a printing press and see if the Magna Carta results because that’s the magnitude of chance the order from chaos theories rest on!

Finally, how can you look on the splendour of a country scene, a group of beautiful snow-capped mountains or a wonderful sunset over a silvery sea, and not see the hand of a Creator in it all? The answer is pride. That’s all. You’re proud. Eternity is a hell of long time to be wrong proud person.

Advertisements
7 comments
  1. Chris said:

    it is flawed to reject a complex theory, like evolution, with so much evidence in it’s favour. By rejecting it on such simplistic and baseless grounds, we quickly expose that this author, like others, have no willingness to discover the truth. Instead seek ways (blunt and informative ways) of bashing anything that disagrees with their view; no matter how compelling the bashing is.

    Then, just to try and make the argument more compelling, authors often give reason why there should be a loving God, rather than evidence that there is one listening simultaneously to all 7 billion of us (in all those languages) and answering our prayers. I guess if your the type of person that can be persuaded to this that that’s likely, you can be persuaded that someone can walk on water and rise from the dead.

    I then hear; this is but human nature, we all do it. I of course have to conceded this is the case. There are multiple studies showing how we seek the evidence that supports our view. But here’s the thing. Because we are flawed, this does not suggest parity. Far from it; some are more flawed than others. In the same way a petty shoplifter is flawed, but cannot be compared to an armed robber.

    The differences between the approaches of those attempting to create a case for a creator God, will present their evidence is such a skewed fashion, that under any other circumstances they would be considered frauds, liars and cheats. The manipulations are so severe, so distorted and so imbalanced, that if we were using the same scale, there is little or know difference between the methods used here and those used by other revered confidence trickesters like mediums and clairvoyants.

    So yes, two proponents of opposing views will selfishly select and quite mine; but never ever believe that once that rubicon has been crossed, that you are dealing with two equal points of view.

    • Thank you for your contribution Chris it is important that these worldviews are presented to enable the casual reader the liberty to determine the matter for themselves. However, I have to say it’s time to get off your rhetorical hobby horse. As it’s non-christian verifiable scientific evidence you are looking for, here you go:

      “Natural selection can act only on those biological properties that already exist; it cannot create properties in order to meet adaptational needs.” Elmer Noble, Ph.D. Zoology, Glenn Nobel, Ph.D. Biology, Gerhard Schad, Ph.D. Biology, Austin MacInnes, Ph.D. Biology, Parasitology: The Biology of Animal Parasites, 1989, p. 516.

      Therefore, Can natural selection cause one kind (species) to become a new kind? No, it is a scientific impossibility

  2. What has a nasty habit of driving me to distraction is the fact that when arguing for ‘god’, Christians are wont to exclude their god and rather focus on this creator being instead, until the argument swings back to biblical text and then, lo and behold, here come Jesus.

    The Christian god IS Jesus, and without the New Testament Christians would have no notion of this character.
    In fact, and I realise this a moot point, there would be no Christianity and if any monotheism survived we would all be Jews.

    Therefore before we even begin to discuss creation,or flood stories etc we have to establish Jesus’ bona fides and especially his divinity.
    There is no evidence of a Resurrection.
    The trinity is a wholly a Church construct,
    The divinity was bestowed upon Jesus by the church and likes of Constantine and later Theodosius made sure Christianity was law opening the door to attempt to rid the Roman world of what it perceived as heresy.

    Creator? LOL.

    Well,maybe, but it sure a hell wasn’t the christian man-god.

    • Not only is your hermeneutic flawed but also your secular world history. Emperor Constantine called the 325 Counsel of Nicaea in response to the heretical teaching of Arius. Arius had already been denounced as an anathema in 315 for trying to bring gnostic teaching into the church and challenge the deity of Christ. The earliest church fathers had taught Jesus Christ and God as one substance with the Holy Spirit, as recorded in the Bible. You would be right to call into question Constantine’s motives for calling the counsel, for we have no evidence that he was saved but that is incidental to seeing the inspired Word upheld and the canon of the 66 books of the Bible endorsed. The Trinity is a pure biblical concept, we see it from the very first verses of Genesis (the first book of the Pentateuch) and manifest repeatedly throughout Scripture. Come on man, you’re an open minded guy, surely if God is big enough to create the whole universe, and we already established it’s irrational to suggest it came about by chance from nothing, he can manage to provide an infallible book through which we can get to know and learn of his character and nature.

  3. Chris Woods said:

    In answer to Chris’s comment regarding your rejection of evolution, you quote the following as, ” non-christian verifiable scientific evidence”…

    “Natural selection can act only on those biological properties that already exist; it cannot create properties in order to meet adaptational needs.” Elmer Noble, Ph.D. Zoology, Glenn Nobel, Ph.D. Biology, Gerhard Schad, Ph.D. Biology, Austin MacInnes, Ph.D. Biology, Parasitology: The Biology of Animal Parasites, 1989, p. 516.

    Firstly…
    The quote is directly addressing NATURAL SELECTION not EVOLUTION. There is a difference. (As previously discussed.) So there is no “verifiable scientific evidence” against evolution.

    Secondly…
    The quote is often used in creationist literature as some sort of anti-evolution proof but I’m afraid it just highlights the creationists’ misconceptions.
    Nobody thinks natural selection creates properties in order to meet adaptational needs. Creatures are able to pass on their genes because they happen to have survived. The vast majority of mutations are not helpful and these creatures are more likely to die early and so less likely to pass on their genes. (Look at conjoined twins in humans. Most die very young. Very few indeed go on to reproduce. This is because it is not a helpful mutation.)

    At no point in (natural) history did a species decide to have a bigger brain and then, as if by magic, actually had a bigger brain in the next generation.
    Mutations occur, resulting in varying biological properties (both helpful and unhelpful) and then natural selection acts upon these existing biological properties.
    Therefore the quote doesn’t deny the theory of Natural Selection, it actually supports it! So there isn’t even any “verifiable scientific evidence” against Natural Selection.

    Finally…
    Despite being a brilliant parasitologist, Elmer Noble was indoctrinated into his religious beliefs by his missionary parents, so the quote could hardly be said to come from a “non-christian” source.

  4. Thank you, that really is informative. I have no desire to antagonise and I know, for until 5 years ago I was equally perplexed and driven to distraction given that I was also convinced that chimps and mankind had a common ancestor. Nobody had bothered to ask me, “what came first the flowers or the insects to pollinate the flowers and how did one survive without the other?”

    To get a better understanding of the doctrines that so convince evolutionists to reject the evidence presented by God through his creation and his Jesus Christ I have acquired a book called “Bang!” The Complete History of the Universe by Brian May Patrick Moore and Chris Lintott. Here are two quotes:

    “Everything, space, time and matter, came into existence with a “Big Bang”, around 13.7 billion years ago. …Moreover, the entire universe was smaller than a pin prick, and it was unbelievably hot. At once it began to expand – and as it spread out from this bizarre, unexpected start, it evolved into the universe we see today.

    Modern science is unable to describe or explain anything that happened in the first 10-43 seconds after the Big Bang…”

    Second quote:

    “So do we believe in the Big Bang? Its major competitor, the steady-state theory, now seems finally dead. For now, the Big Bang holds the stage alone. We must remember that it is impossible to prove a theory, and all one can hope to do is ensure it is consistent with all the available evidence. The Big Band with inflation appears to satisfy the requirement. However, at any moment a new discovery could expose a fatal flaw in the theory. Until a new Newton or another Einstein conjures up something better we must live with the Big Bang”

    Now don’t get me wrong Chris, it’s a wonderful book that explores our universe, the creation of stars, sizes and numbers of galaxies etc. But look at the language in those quotes above: ‘unable to explain’, ‘bizzare’, ‘unexpected’, ‘impossible’,’theory’, ‘conjure up’.

    Is this it? Is that the best these fellas can do? Is that what causes you to shake off my efforts to grab you and warn you of the cliff you are about to blindly walk over? Talk of the blind leading the blind. How did life come from dead things? It didn’t, it’s unscientific to suggest it can, to suppose that something, a very hot pin prick can come from nothing is just ignorance on a monumental scale and proof that you can be educated way beyond your intelligence. Please don’t risk another night living in rebellion. Look to the Cross on Calvary where the Prince of Peace died for your sins. Repent and put your faith and trust in Him alone.

  5. Chris Woods said:

    Adrian,

    Thanks for the reply and well done for getting hold of the book.
    Ultimately, faith is faith and I wish you all the best with yours but please be careful when re-quoting scientists from creationist websites.

    Chris

    PS. – Insects came many millions of years before flowers. It is likely however modern bees evolved from bee-like creatures at the same time of the first angiosperms.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: